sonarr_get_rename

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The only behavioral disclosure is the readOnlyHint annotation, which is safe to assume. The description adds nothing about pagination, response structure, or side effects, providing no additional transparency beyond what the annotation already states.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

At two words, the description is extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It omits critical information needed for correct tool selection and invocation, making the brevity harmful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has two optional parameters and an output schema, a minimal description should at least outline what rename data is returned and how the parameters filter results. The current description is inadequate for a list operation and fails to provide essential context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema lists series_id and season_number as optional integers, but neither the schema nor the description explains their semantics. With 0% schema coverage, the description was expected to clarify these parameters but does not, leaving the agent to guess.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'List rename' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'get_rename' without specifying what 'rename' refers to (e.g., rename history, scheduled renames) or how it differs from sibling list tools. It lacks a clear resource and context, making it vague and unhelpful.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many other list tools (e.g., sonarr_list_episodefile, sonarr_list_series). No context, alternatives, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent without direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.